TOPIC:

Still working on the transcription of the private diary of 7509 Pte. Edward Frankiln Lynn, R.C.R., later Major DSO. MC.

Have found this interesting entry......

Friday Jan. 26. 1900
Scots Ridge (Belmont)

Got up at 5 a.m. Went on route march a 6 a.m. Marched about 8 miles in circle about camp. Wrote letter home. Got issued with Queen's Chocolate and is much prized by many of the men a few I am sorry to say selling theirs for a trifle. Nothing else to write in particular. To bed at 8.30.

Mike

Bringing alive "a long rested thread" !!

Are there any other differences/ways to ID the manufacturer other than just the size of the tin -
(eg)
Cadbury Tin: 81mm x 158mm x 22mm
Fry and Rowntree Tin: 92mm x 152mm x 22mm

Naturally in the tin there is no chocolate left !!

I have tried to source the booklet on the Queen Victoria Chocolate tin's that I have seen on the internet but its out of stock -
Anyone with a spare copy to sell would be most welcome.
Hopefully that may offer answers but in the meantime .....

With Fry's and Rowntree's tin being the same dimensions I am trying to figure out how to distinguish what is the manufacturer of the tin.

Alan

Hello Alan,

One way of telling the difference takes a bit of patience and good eyesight. The Fry's boxes have a greater number of beads around the bust of Queen Victoria, the ratio of Fry's to Rowntree's being 86 to 77.

There are other small differences in the bust itself, but you need to have two boxes side by side to notice these. For instance, the crown on the Fry's box is higher, coming to within 1 mm of the beading, opposed to 2 mm in the case of Rowntree's.

The hinges on the Rowntree's boxes are slightly longer: 118 mm opposed to 110 mm.

And the diameters of the central medallion are slightly different. Rowntree's, 68 mm; Fry's, 65 mm.

I hope this helps.

Neville

..

Private H. Lancaster, of the 2nd King's Own Royal Lancaster Regiment, in a letter home, dated June 30th, 1900, said "I have not as yet received my chocolate box, but expect to. I have made inquiries about it, but have not as yet got a definite answer."

Also, were boxes held in reserve for soldiers who were prisoners at Pretoria until their release?

Berenice,

Many soldiers were still without their chocolate as late as November 1900.

Army Order 211, Pretoria, 3rd November 1900.

3. ISSUE OF QUEEN'S CHOCOLATE.
Numerous applications having been received regarding the issue of Queen's Chocolate, General Officers Commanding and all concerned are informed that as the supply is exhausted, an application has been cabled home for sufficient chocolate to issue to soldiers who were serving in South Africa prior to 1st January, 1900, and untill a reply is received no issue can be made or the applications replied to.

I know that my great grandfather (an officer) came home with two boxes, so assuming others took more than their allotted share, it is unsurprising that many went without.

..

The final Army Order addressing this issue was published on 19th June 1901. This seems to indicate that roughly 15 percent never received the Queen's Chocolate. It is extraordinary that the last issue of chocolate was made in June 1901, a full eighteen months after the initial distribution.

Army Order 353, Pretoria, 19th June 1901.

4. QUEEN'S CHOCOLATE.
With reference to Army Order No. 3, of 3rd November 1900, it has been decided that no further issue of Queen's Chocolate will be made from home.
It is regretted that the number of boxes remaining unissued in South Africa, will admit of an issue of 12 1/2 per cent only, of the number still due to units who have received 75 per cent of their strength.
Application for this issue should be made to the General Officer Commanding, Cape Colony District.

By Order,
W.F. KELLY, Major-General,
Adjutant General.


,,,